THE dismay at the decision of the EPA to grant
Indaver a licence to operate its proposed incinerator in Ringaskiddy
is compounded by the fact that we are not even yet getting the full
picture.

The development, as proposed, has the built-in
capability to increase its capacity by 100%. Did anyone expect the
EPA to overturn a licence that it had granted? And when Indaver looks
for a licence to expand this monstrosity, does anyone expect the EPA
to do anything other than grant it?

Talk of safe dioxin levels is an insult; there
is no such thing and to enter into debate on it is madness. The same
goes for the rest of the toxic emissions from incinerators - mercury,
heavy metals, and so on.

The location has been highlighted as particularly
unsuitable for such a development. The outcome of the planning hearing
bears witness to this, even though the EPA chose not to listen to
the advice of its own inspector.

This begs the question: why Ringaskiddy? Is it
because its harbour location is suitable for importing waste from
abroad?

Is it the fact that the residents are already
living with high levels of pollution; some more won’t make any
difference and the impact on health will be easier to hide. The best
method of ‘hiding’ pollution is to generate it in an already
polluted environment.

This incinerator must be stopped for the sake
of our health, environment and democracy. Despite the assertions of
the EPA, Indaver and Environment Minister Dick Roche, incineration
is not a solution. It is merely and abdication of responsibility by
the State and an opportunity for mega-profits for a multinational
company.